zeldafandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:Interwiki Policy
Interwiki Policy Hello everybody. I'm back.This time, I've got something for you to chew on. Neo just contacted me on skype and warmed me that if one of our users ever flamed another user, he would be banned. Now, being careful, I asked him how said user was flaming, as he seemed polite and confident in all of the evidence presented to me. Get this: Zelda Wiki has and Inter-wiki policy that the User had been breaking, and in his politeness, actually flamming. I advice everybody to read it, and follow it in case of an incident. I'll summarize it here: *''Please bring up all problems with staff members, not users.'' This seems reasonable enough. *''Please back up your claims of page stealing with specific lines of text, not just the page.'' The page history should suffice. *''Please don't harass anybody.'' This is a tough one. (Joking, of course) *''Please contact Mr kmil if you have a claim that seems serious enough for it not to be petty theft.'' Okay, I added this one myself, but think about it. I am constantly on my computer, and ZP is still my homepage. I'll see anything within a few hours of it being posted. Any delays would be coming from the ZW side. Let me know if anything goes wrong. And to think, I was thinking about retiring, Mr kmil 23:09, April 18, 2010 (UTC) :I like this idea. Especially that it makes a note of the GFDL and GNU free doc licenses (which has been troublesome in the past). It's not exactly all-out war against ZW, but agreeing to disagree with them is better than the open hostility we currently have. —[[User:Baltro|'Baltro']] [ [[User Talk:Baltro|'talk']] · ] 23:14, April 18, 2010 (UTC) ::No dice. --AuronKaizer ' 23:15, April 18, 2010 (UTC) :::@AK You don't think have a simple set of guidelines saying "Play nice with the other kids" would be a good idea? —[[User:Baltro|'Baltro]] [ [[User Talk:Baltro|'talk']] · ] 23:16, April 18, 2010 (UTC) ::::You can tell them when they decide to actually listen to us and not brush everything off, we may start going to the staff. Because they have shown us no good reason to go to them for anything. Boom roasted. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 23:42, April 18, 2010 (UTC) :::::Is this about an interwiki policy, or just ZeldaWiki? Because it seems like everybody is opposing ZeldaWiki, not the idea itself. —[[User:Baltro|'Baltro']] [ [[User Talk:Baltro|'talk']] · ] 23:49, April 18, 2010 (UTC) ::::::Just Zeldawiki. Its the only website that steals our crap and then denies it. But has no problem saying we stole theirs. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 23:53, April 18, 2010 (UTC) I hate Zelda Wiki. So much. It's not even funny. Also, I'm new to wiki, so sorry if this sounds stupid, but since when did we have "staff members?" anyways (as if my opinion matters)no to the first one until I know what staff members are, number 2 i'd actually like to see enforced on ZW (yeah, right) 3 i'm fine with, and 4 i'm fine with. Well there is my two cents ( and again, i'm new to wiki, so don't make fun of me if this sounds stupid.--Hylianhero777 (talk) 19:31, April 19, 2010 (UTC) :I have attempted to work with them before and got virtually nowhere. They always deny things or say they don't have authority to take action. So I see no point in listening to their requests to go to them. Neo is their only level headed user. If they start actually working with us, I will gladly work with them. They should stop requesting things from us if they don't plan to return the favor though. That is what I am saying. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 19:37, April 19, 2010 (UTC) Since your'e on, Joe, mind answering my stupid "staff member" question?--Hylianhero777 (talk) 20:22, April 19, 2010 (UTC) :What about it? Staff is just the b'crats. It doesn't mean anything more than that. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 20:24, April 19, 2010 (UTC) oh, alright then. that actually makes sense.--Hylianhero777 (talk) 20:43, April 19, 2010 (UTC) :Yep. ZP is still run internally. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 20:44, April 19, 2010 (UTC) ::You know, its ironic that you would say something like that Joe, because I have had no trouble in the past dealing with any trouble. Most conflict comes from people like you and HoT87, who are just opposed to dealing with the other in any way. Just consider this for once. You may see positive outcomes. Mr kmil 15:47, April 20, 2010 (UTC) :What is ironic is that you have done relatively nothing, and that is why you havn't had trouble with them; yet you'll scold me on the issue. While you apparentally Skype chat with them all the time, I rarely see you on ZP. Maybe that is why you've never had trouble in the past. I on the other hand can safely speak for myself (as well as Xykeb and CC) that we have had issues with them. And we have witnessed them come up with bull excuses. And if they want us to work with them and with respect because they are authoritative, than it should be mutual. And they should act as authoritative figures when we ask them to for good reasons. And for the record this was not meant to be an attack on you. I just needed to get my point across. I hope I don't hurt your feelings or anything. So in short, instead of asking us to further appease them, you should go to them first and make sure they understand everything I just said. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 23:06, April 20, 2010 (UTC) alright then, my vote is yes. to all. they break this on our side though (as in stealing articles) then no. that is ridiculous. I'm REALLY tired of those guys.--Hylianhero777 (talk) 19:23, April 20, 2010 (UTC) I'm actually glad someone started to address this.I've been observing the situation for a while,and, in my opinion,it's juvenile and senseless.Again,my opinion.No links to anyone except me.--Farore.din.nayru (talk) 13:58, April 21, 2010 (UTC) :Joe, I have in fact been very inactive when it comes to editing, but I do spend a lot of time looking at things, checking up on the images, and just seeing how everybody is doing. I personally feel like I have been trying to help, but just can't due to the bad blood between wikis. I am not calling anybody out on this. Just please, I'll ask them to be more complient, if you'll just go to the Staff with everything theft related. Mr kmil 14:22, April 21, 2010 (UTC) ::Here's why I am pissed and could care less about their whining. We have gone to them before like they asked and they have always straight up denied the issue, later saying we may have been right, but its in the past and they can't do anything about it anymore, or claimed they don't have authority to do so in the first place. So, if this is how they want to act, I will just ignore their wishes and go straight to the source. Whats the point of going to them when I'll just be shut down? At least the editors themselves seem to understand what they did wrong and stop. If the staff wants us to come to them they should actually take action when we do. If you tell them this, and they agree, I will try it one more time. I will go to them when needed. If it turns out to be much of the same however, I will never go to them again and that will be the end of it. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 17:07, April 21, 2010 (UTC) ::: Alright, I'll do that later tonight when Justin logs back into Skype. And Joe, you were very polite, it was just you were talking to the wrong person. I congratulate you on that. --Mr kmil 18:03, April 21, 2010 (UTC) I'm all for beening pleasant with them, but if a non-admin on ZW attacks or defaces someone from over here, I'm liable to bring it to the person who said it. Aside from that I think it would be a good idea. O and please nobody try to attack ZW, it won't be really that productive, and we really don't want to be the aggressors in this situation.'-- C2' / 20:16, April 27, 2010 (UTC)